by Corinne Murdock | Dec 13, 2022 | News
By Corinne Murdock |
On Monday, the Mohave County Board of Supervisors canceled their upcoming special meeting to discuss potential election litigation against Maricopa County and Secretary of State Katie Hobbs.
The board didn’t offer an explanation for their decision to cancel the meeting. They first announced the special meeting last week.
AZ Free News reached out to the board’s communications director for comment. He didn’t respond by press time.
The county delayed certification of their election results amid expressed uncertainty over the validity of Maricopa County’s results. They certified their results about two weeks ago. Chairman Ron Gould stated during the certification that he was compelled under threat of arrest to certify the results.
“I vote aye under duress. I found out today that I have no choice but to vote ‘aye’ or I will be arrested and charged with a felony,” stated Gould. “I don’t think that’s what our Founders had in mind when they used a democratic process to elect our leaders, our form of self-government. I find that very disheartening.”
The board is facing an open meeting law complaint filed by a Kingman-based political action committee (PAC) for making a “political statement” during certification of the election results. The PAC, Real Change for LD5, named Chairman Ron Gould and Supervisors Hildy Anguis and Travis Lingenfelter in the complaint submitted to Attorney General Mark Brnovich.
Chairman Ron Gould called the complaint “baseless” in a statement to Mohave Valley Daily News.
“The agenda states ‘discussion and possible action re: Approval of the Canvass of the election,’” stated Gould. “I am sure that the attorney general will agree that the phrase possible action would cover approval and denial.”
Behind the complaint is the PAC founder and chair, J’aime Morgaine. She sued Rep. Paul Gosar (R-AZ-04) in 2018 after he blocked her from his Facebook page; the ACLU picked up the lawsuit after Gosar restored her access and she dropped it. However, the ACLU also voluntarily dismissed the case four months later.
That same year, Morgaine ran an unsuccessful bid for the State Senate. She lost in the general election to Sen. Sonny Borrelli (LD-30).
In a statement, Morgaine called the board members’ protest over the election results a “nasty habit” that undermined confidence in elections.
“The bottom line is this is an election integrity issue,” said Morgaine. “These supervisors have every right to be angry and protest in any personal capacity, but they do not have the right or legal authority to misappropriate Mohave County’s governing forum or taxpayer resources to perpetuate disinformation about Mohave County’s election integrity and undermine confidence in Arizona’s elections.”
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
by Terri Jo Neff | Jun 5, 2022 | News
By Terri Jo Neff |
A judge in Mohave County is expected to rule by noon on Monday whether Arizonans could lose their ability to vote by mail without providing an excuse.
Judge Lee Jantzen is being asked by the Arizona Republican Party and its chair, Kelli Ward, to declare the state’s no-excuse voting by mail “system” unconstitutional despite the fact the system has been in effect for three decades. The judge heard arguments last Friday to issue a preliminary injunction to ban no-excuse voting by mail effective with the upcoming Nov. 8 General Election.
About 85 percent of all ballots cast in the 2020 General Election—including Ward’s ballot—were mailed out to voters in advance of the election. But the AZGOP contends the law passed by the Legislature in 1991 violates the constitutional requirement that Arizona’s elections be held in such a way to ensure “secrecy in voting.”
The lawsuit argues the only ballots which should be accepted through the mail are those from voters who provide a satisfactory excuse—such as military service, a disability that makes it a burden to vote in person, or being out of town on Election Day.
(The AZGOP acknowledged in their May 17 lawsuit that there is not enough time to outlaw no-excuse voting for the Aug. 2 Primary Election as ballots are in the process of being printed so they can be in voters’ mailboxes in early July.).
Attorneys for Arizona Secretary of State Katie Hobbs and several county election officials argued to Jantzen that there is nothing unconstitutional with Arizona’s no-excuse voting by mail system. They also advised the judge of the practical problems with trying to ban a practice after 30 years without much advance notice to voters and those responsible for running each county’s elections.
One such problem involves the Active Early Voter List, from which ballots are sent to voters who have signed up to receive them by mail. Those voters recently received a reminder notice from their respective county recorder with the 2022 election schedule and confirming the voters will receive ballots by mail for the primary and general elections.
The AZGOP argued to Jantzen that counties can be forced to accommodate changes in time for the General Election, even if it requires hiring thousands more poll workers and election staff across the state, scrounging to find enough voting machines and other election-related equipment, and locating facilities which can accommodate millions more in-person voters than have turned out in years.
That argument was pushed back on during Friday’s hearing by an attorney for seven of Arizona’s 15 county recorders responsible for the voting by mail process and county election directors who are responsible for election day voting and ballot tabulation.
“They cannot conjure polling places or poll workers out of nothing,” Karen Hartman-Tellez of the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office told Jantzen.
Whatever order Jantzen issues in response to the AZGOP’s preliminary injunction request is likely to be appealed. But even if no-excuse voting by mail is allowed to take place this year, the AZGOP’s constitutional challenge does not die.
Instead, the litigation will move forward to a trial under civil court rules, same as any other lawsuit.
